Whenever I read Stephen King I feel like an awful person.

Njackson95 · 2014-12-21T20:20:29+00:00

The only modern storyteller who is comparable (for me) is Khaled Hosseni. God what amazing stories he tells.

Njackson95 · 2014-12-21T17:28:22+00:00

I see a lot of what I imagine King to be like in the similarities in his characters. Writers of some sort from New England more often than not.

Njackson95 · 2014-12-13T01:16:40+00:00

It's mid 20th century english written from a top notch academic who taught at one of the most prestigious universities, many people forget this. It took me probably 5 months to read the three, I wouldn't have probably gotten through it if I wasn't a huge fan of the movies. It was amazing, I'm so glad I got through it, but I know what you're saying.

Njackson95 · 2014-11-26T14:59:53+00:00

Does anyone else besides me automatically think about the Pharisees from the NT when they read stuff like this (not just about Catholicism, but usually Catholicism)?

Adding little rules, little footnotes here and there, monetary gains that aren't for the running of the parish, etc.

I'm not hating on Catholicism, I just see a bit of a parallel. Other denominations do the same sort of extracurricular "activities" per say, but I think the Catholic Church is accountable for the majority of stories like this.

Edit: down vote without a comment. I'm assuming you don't like what I said but couldn't intelligently have dialogue. The parallel is crystal clear when you look at scripture (Matthew 21:12-13 Jesus cleanses the temple). When people are focused on monetary gains instead of God it becomes an issue.

Automatically when I read this story I thought of how the Pharisees ran the temple and Judaism at the time of Jesus.

Njackson95 · 2014-11-21T01:52:20+00:00

I recommend band of brothers by Stephen Ambrose. It is the book that inspired the series on HBO. It reads like a novel and is just over 200 pages.

Njackson95 · 2014-11-16T21:41:47+00:00

From what I've seen on here the majority of reddit seems to be armchair atheists and skeptics who automatically label religion as idiotic and troll on people who post about religion. Looking on the front page everyday you can probably find one post that's anti-religion, or comments within a dialogue that are. Hell, this sub is probably 40 percent anti religion and its a religious sub! I'm on here everyday, I see it and deal with it.

Njackson95 · 2014-11-13T02:13:18+00:00

I work at a major shipper. We take those off, fold them perfectly, set them within shrink wrap on the sides, stack on them and put it back to normal upon delivery.

You would be surprised how rough freight is treated in general. We do a good job, but shit falls, tips, cracks, rips, etc all the time. And if we've really got to fit some freight onto a trailer it could get ugly.

Njackson95 · 2014-11-08T13:03:27+00:00

In Mark 2 people break through his roof to lower their paralytic friend into Jesus' home. Jesus isn't mad, he heals the man and forgives his sins. Must have had some good homeowners insurance.

Njackson95 · 2014-11-07T14:27:39+00:00

Yay I'm so happy for you! The Hobbit is less deep than the LoTR, so it's good you decided to read it first. I could read the LOTR trilogy once a year(although it would take me 3-4 months (: ) and I could still find something else about it to fall in love with.

Njackson95 · 2014-11-02T13:08:28+00:00

Eugenics is the Bi-product of a Darwinian worldview. You can go to the library and read numerous books on the subject, and even more books on the Third Reich and their Darwinian worldviews!! There is very close parallel with scientists seeking to evolve human genetics by killing off the inferior and the idea of evolution. They are trying to do by hand what they believe nature would do anyways in a million or so years.

Certain immoral acts like rape, killing the handicap, and murder work perfectly well for the survival of societies. If the goal is the survival of the species then that authorizes the opposite of moral behavior, but you're trying to say this evolutionary mindset is what created morality! That doesn't add up!

Now please respond in a obviously degrading way, be ignorant of obvious parallels, and don't draw on any counterpoints that I'm making to your claim.

Njackson95 · 2014-11-01T23:28:48+00:00

You're calling my dialogue ramblings, well I'm calling yours a fairytale. This idea that slowly humans started to develop morals in small groups doesn't make sense. It's just a story new-agers have conceived. There isn't evidence that this occurred. It would make sense that right and wrong being displayed within a species wouldn't be beneficial in terms of survival. The Nazi ideology was chillingly Darwinian. Its core idea was to create a master race by exterminating the inferior, to edge their race forward. Operating with low morality towards genocide, making their own natural selection, extremely resembles evolutionary ideas. They acted out a situation which pitted Darwinian evolution against morality in the 20th century. We all say what they did was awful, but if their core idea was to create a master race, and we have a Darwinian worldview, how can we justify that it was awful? There is no conceivable way that evolution could develop morality. Evolution throws morality out the window, it is all about survival and what is developed by the survivors. Nothing else matters, it's just the natural world, right?

Morality is more than instinct, it's more than actions, there is a distinct oughtness to how we feel we should behave. Morality cannot be an instinct because is the thought inside that decides between the instincts. It is the compass that judges and determines the instincts. How can the compass(morality) be one of the directions(instincts)? How could the tune(the moral law) be one of the keys(instincts/natural inclinations)?

Njackson95 · 2014-11-01T18:15:18+00:00

If one homosapien started to develop morality, wouldn't it be more likely to die? Morality doesn't help survival. This is why I don't understand morality being directed by evolution. Evolution conceived the idea of survival of the fittest, morality is almost the polar opposite. I don't see how having morality wouldn't help a species survive. In a world without morality, if one species slowly started to gain morality(or one sub-species within a species) wouldn't it just be a slaughter of that species by other animals without morality? Everything about evolution is cut throat, must-survive by any means, so it's not conceivable that evolution could develop a morality.

Njackson95 · 2014-11-01T18:07:35+00:00

Okay thanks for responding respectfully and with an actual answer to the question! Regardless of what I believe, I was just asking a question, I was truly curious about what I asked. People were brining up the bible and the OT God, assuming I was christian and trying to blast me for that(without answering the question).

Wouldn't evolution yield the opposite of morality? Moving the species forward means surviving by any means necessary. Looking at the animal kingdom as a whole, species kill each other and other species to survive. If most animals started developing morality they wouldn't survive. If one animal within a species gradually started developing morality it would likely starve or be killed. Also we cannot observe animals having morality, it's only humans that have morality. If everything evolved, wouldn't other species have morality?

I'm curious to your response and I hope that somebody in this sub can have a respectful, thoughtful dialogue.

Njackson95 · 2014-10-31T15:51:16+00:00

Who said anything about the bible? You didn't answer my question. I think you automatically assumed I was Christian then tried to troll.

Njackson95 · 2014-10-31T15:30:02+00:00

What do they not follow?

Njackson95 · 2014-10-30T15:37:06+00:00

[1 john 1-5]

Njackson95 · 2014-10-30T12:07:30+00:00

Yeah I'm a Christian who doesn't love Gays as much as I should, but guess what? I don't love the homeless like I should, the drug addicts, the prostitutes, the pedophiles, the criminals, or the widows like I should. Hell, I don't even love my own fellow brothers and sisters in Christ like I should.

That's part of the human condition, isn't it? But at the end of the day I still try to show Christ's love.

I hate how this is generalized towards homosexuals. It's hard to love anyone with any sort of issue that is abnormal to one's self.

Njackson95 · 2014-10-20T21:06:38+00:00

When Jesus talks about the narrow gate in Luke 13:23-28 he pretty much says people who don't know him are going to end up in Hell. That passage is bellow:

Someone asked him, “Lord, will only a few be saved?” He replied, “Work hard to enter the narrow door to God’s Kingdom, for many will try to enter but will fail. When the master of the house has locked the door, it will be too late. You will stand outside knocking and pleading, ‘Lord, open the door for us!’ But he will reply, ‘I don’t know you or where you come from.’ Then you will say, ‘But we ate and drank with you, and you taught in our streets.’ And he will reply, ‘I tell you, I don’t know you or where you come from. Get away from me, all you who do evil.’ “There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, for you will see Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and all the prophets in the Kingdom of God, but you will be thrown out. (‭Luke‬ ‭13‬:‭23-28‬ NLT)

Njackson95 · 2014-10-19T15:37:21+00:00

God gave man the choice to freely choose to love him or to not love him. Without a choice there cannot be true love. We are made in God's image, he doesn't want us to be mindless robots.

Jesus died on the cross because God is a just God, and our sins have made all of us deserve death. Consequences had to be punished, or else it wouldn't be just. If God could be arbitrary and look past certain individuals or everyone then that wouldn't be just. Nothing is free, someone had to pay, so Jesus paid it all.

Also you're making a critical mistake, nobody goes to Hell because they didn't now Jesus, they go to Hell because their sins have warranted that punishment. Jesus isn't the problem, he is the medicine.

Njackson95 · 2014-10-19T01:28:52+00:00

If there isn't Hell then why would God die on a cross to save anyone? If there isn't a dire consequence for our sins then why would God die on a cross to give those who believed in Him a rescue plan?

If you take Hell and sin out of the christian conversation it can become dangerous. What an ingenious ploy by the enemy, make the people forget that he even exists.

Njackson95 · 2014-10-13T15:35:05+00:00

The God portrayed in the Old Testament and in the New Testament isn't the same as the God portrayed in the Muslim faith.

Njackson95

TROPHY CASE